RPA: Does declared "movement" toward Europe actually conceal Turkish  agenda and Turkification of Armenia?

ArmInfo.  Armenian Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan is using every possible means to find loopholes to  return Armenian products to the Russian market. Artak Zakaryan, a  member of the board of the Republican Party, writes about this in his  article.

"As predicted (I wrote about this 20 days ago), having realized the  dire consequences of his futile actions, Nikol reappeared in Russia.  Not at a high-level, official Moscow, but at the Innoprom-2026  exhibition in Yekaterinburg. I'm sure he went to look for ways to  return to Moscow. Ursula von der Leyen's visit did not provide  financial or economic consolation for the ruling Civil Contract  party. There were many promises, but incomparably little real  support. Moreover, Europe is already providing significant support to  the Civil Contract party in its "victory" in the elections at any  cost and in the constant persecution of political opposition figures.  So Pashinyan has nothing to complain about from the EU; they are  helping him as best they can to cling to power and conceal the loss  of Artsakh," Zakarian noted.

He added that the EU's primary concern today is whether Nikol  Pashinyan will be able to completely sever relations with Russia. The  problem is that Armenia's economic dependence on Russia is  significantly greater than Moldova's, and, furthermore, Armenia does  not share a border with the European Union.

"The RA Ministry of Foreign Affairs makes no secret of the fact that  for now they would like to maintain favorable economic relations with  Moscow while distancing themselves from it in the security sphere.   Judging by the already tense situation between the EU (NATO) and the  Russian Federation, Nikol's Western partners will put even more  pressure on him in the near future and will not allow him to "sit on  two chairs" (Alain from Aghdam was the first "victim" of this  policy). The EU's "Eastern Partnership" has ruthless experience in  this regard. We've seen Ukraine, we've seen Moldova, and earlier  we've seen Georgia, where economic benefits from ties with Russia  played no role in political choices. When the choice is made in favor  of Russia's adversaries, the socioeconomic interests of these  countries fade into the background.

Why? Because the regimes that came to power in these countries, as  well as in Armenia, have pursued and continue to pursue one goal: to  secure the role of "victim" of contradictions between the EU and  Russia, and, if necessary, of war, for the sake of the EU's security  and well-being. Our friend Georgia, After his own experience, he  refuses to follow this path a second time. In parallel with the  current EU problem, for us Armenians, against the backdrop of  anti-Russian sentiment, the question is becoming increasingly  pressing: "Are we being led to Europe or to Turkey?" Perhaps the most  pressing issue in the debate is whether the declared "movement"  toward Europe actually conceals a Turkish agenda and the  Turkification of Armenia.